Mote (Motte) (2)

life
I-"' ^
>-:• O-.^
05
•sj,,
f h-^
feSSd
^ Ci? rq
g- 1
/r>firRen5 /noT£
fi,\-%o eii HAR^&y
330 Indiana Magazine of History
Mote, he studied at the Academy of Fine Arts in Cincinnati
and also in Paris. He has exhibited paintings and sculpture
at various salons and expositions in Europe and in the United
States, receiving many medals.^®
Harvey himself has told the story of how he came to
study art, his association with Mote, and his impressions of
his first art teacher: "While in my teens [thirteen] I at
tended one of the Friends Quarterly Meetings at Wilming
ton [Ohio]. It was announced that on the following day a
distinguished artist from Richmond, a Quaker, would be
present to give a chalk talk lesson on some Bible character.
I need not tell you I was there, 'present early' in choice seat,
center, facing platform. ... I was all eyes and expectancy,
eager to see a real artist, not just pictured in prints and with
written descriptions of beings that might be termed super
men, with heroic statures, flowing beards and shaggy locks.
Then Marcus came in. I saw a man of unimposing stature,
about 5' 2", past middle life, clean shaven face, light brown
hair, considerably grayed, blue eyes, a ruddy healthy com
plexion, plump cheeks void of wrinkles, and serene brow. He
walked nimbly and talked glibly. Standing before the black
board with a box of crayons nearby, he addressed the large
assembly with a few preliminary remarks, then proceeded
to draw while talking. ... I can't recall a single word he
said nor drawing he made, but I can yet see him as he made
his entrance and exit, wearing a dark brown smock that
made him look like somebody's grandmother, well preserved
for her age."'®
Feeling a great desire to study art, the boy visited the
art school in Cincinnati but found that the tuition was $85.00
a year, discouraging information for a farm boy of limited
means. With his father's consent he wrote to Mote to see
what the latter could offer in the way of art education. Mote
replied: "That there may be no misunderstanding between
us I will write thee terms and conditions. Our home is a
plain brick house. Thee may have a bed room up stairs and
have meals with us in the dining room down stairs. Rhoda,
my wife, will board thee and take care of thy bedroom. She
will cook for thee breakfast, dinner and supper, which will
be plain but substantial food, every day of the week includ
ing First Day. Our charge for board and lessons will be
18 Who's Who in America, 1950-1951, p. 1165.
10 Eli Harvey to Alta Harvey Heiser, Alhambra, California,
October 17. 1948. This letter is the property of his cousin, a resided of
Hamilton, Ohio. Harvey was a birthright Quaker, bom at Ogden, Ohio.
Marcus Mote and his Pioneer School of Design 331
$4.00 a week, payable in advance. My studio is within
walking distance down town on Main Street. If thee decides
to come thee can walk with me to the studio when I open
the door. On First Days thee can accompany me to the
Friends Meeting in the large building where the Indiana
Yearly Meeting is held. I forgot to tell thee that the charge
above quoted does not include art material. Bring thy box of
paints. I have easels.''^®
So Eli Harvey became a pupil of Marcus Mote, who set
him to copying colored prints. He was so homesick that at
the end of the month he returned home; there he remained
until he was nineteen, when he entered the art school in
Cincinnati. Since Mote did not keep a journal at this time,
no record remains of his opinion of the boy who lived in his
home, spent a month in his studio, and was to become the
most famous of his students.
Mote knew that in 1864 the public schools of Cincinnati
had added art to their curriculum. As the leading art center
in the Middle West it was natural that Cincinnati should
lead in making art training as available to students as any
other branch of learning. Mote published an article in the
Richmond Weekly Telegram, April 27, 1867, stating his be
lief that the public schools should train students "for all
that is civil and useful." Since the ability to draw is useful,
he argued, often even necessary, to a mechanic, and since a
knowledge of the principles of art is of great advantage to
a housewife, it followed that art should be taught in the public
schools.
Mote was aware of the opposition of the Quakers to
the fine arts, but in following art as a vocation, in acting as
an art teacher in his private school, and in advocating the
teaching of art in the public schools, he thought of himself
as a good Quaker who differed only in interpretation. Had
not George Fox instructed his followers to teach the young
all that was civil and useful in creation? Therefore his task
was to persuade the Quakers and the general public that a
knowledge of art was civil and useful. In his heart he knew
that in thus making art of use to others man could find per
sonal happiness, and that even fine art had a high level of
usefulness, though it usually brought, in the words of Rus-
kin, only bitter bread and salt and going up and down other
people's stairs.
20 This information was supplied by Eli Harvey in a letter to the
author dated December 7, 1950.
O w
^:Si§
C5^
7*-
Ei9 *«SI." • .isnj
r^
09 s.
IndiaTia Magazine of History
For these reasons Mote continued his campaign to raise
the level of art appreciation and instruction in Richmond.
On August 22, 1868, another article on the subject appeared
in the Richmond Telegram. It was unsigned, but Mote's
journal entry on August 19 indicated that he was the author:
"It is generally conceded that schools are intended to pre
pare the pupil for the active duties of adult life. Is this
strictly true of our present system? Are not pupils taught
many things they never have any use for in after life, and
are not some things entirely omitted which are of primary
importance? Among the last, which is almost or entirely
omitted in our schools, is practical drawing. A knowledge
of Drawing, it must be admitted, is of use in all of the
necessary details of life. Drawing gives the pupil a knowl
edge of form, size and proportion, and will assist the future
woman as housekeeper, shopkeeper, lecturer, teacher, etc.;
and to the future man it is almost indispensable, whether
as architect, builder, mechanic, merchant or farmer. Then
why is Drawing omitted? Can any one of our educators
tell? I pause for a reply."
A year later Mote carried his concern directly to the
supertendent of schools and to the mayor. An act of the
Indiana legislature of 1865 had authorized schools to make
additions to a specified list of subjects under certain condi
tions. The superintendent and the mayor did not believe
the demand was sufficient in 1869 to justify action on
Mote's concern.'^
His next move was directed at the general public, a
campaign of propaganda to increase the demand for the
teaching of art. He had hundreds of circulars printed at his
own expense and personally distributed them. These called
attention specifically to the need of apprentices in the furni
ture factories for training in drawing. It is likely that he
hoped to be the teacher for such a class, independent of the
public school system. He realized that he did not have the
technical training which would be required by school boards
for teaching an accredited class. A class for apprentices did
not materialize, however."
Throughout the summer of 1872 the artist visited var
ious Richmond factories to secure signatures to a petition to
the school trustees for evening schools for drawing. He
Mote Journal, October 27 and 29, 1869, See also Lawa of
Indiana, 1865, p. 32.
'2 Mote Journal, May 26-27, 1871.
Marcus Mote and his Pioneer School of Design 333
supplemented the list by going up and down the streets
soliciting signatures. On September 24 he appeared by ap
pointment before the assembled trustees and presented the
list, which had grown to the imposing length of ten feet. To
reinforce the request, he submitted a statement to the Rich
mond Palladium'. "We understand the mechanics of most
of the machine shops of this city have taken the subject in
hand to have free evening drawing Schools in this city
this coming autumn and winter, and to effect their object
have been obtaining the signatures of most of our intelli
gent citizens, without regard to sect or politics, to a petition
^dressed to our respected and vigilant School Trustees ask
ing them to open such evening schools. And that the peti
tion having reached the length of about ten feet, was pre
sented to the School Trustees at their last sitting. It is a
subject of general interest to our entire city, and is a move
in the right direction to enable our mechanics to compete
with those of other manufacturing cities, and we have no
doubt our School Trustees, being men of public spirit and
intelligence, will see it in that light."" The gratuitous flat
tery attributing superior intelligence and public spirit to
those in power, to be proved by granting the petition, did
not have the desired effect, and no action was taken."
Meanwhile Mote had been authorized by the Richmond
Independent to write for it a report of the Earlham College
commencement scheduled for June 26, 1872. His two-column
story gave a synopsis of the speech made by each of the
seven graduates, with critical comments on the manner
of delivery. He reported also the content of the addresses
by President Joseph Moore and by Timothy Nicholson, presi
dent of the board of trustees. Having the floor, he could not
forgo the opportunity to bring in his own favorite thesis:
"Only one omission was observed to make the occasion equal
to any performance of other College exercises, as regards
appearance or usefulness. It is a matter of regret to many
friends and patrons of Earlham College that she, so thorough
in everything else, should year after year graduate young
^ " Mote's journal on September 20, 1872, told the story of getting
si^atur^ for the ten-foot petition to be presented to the scho<a
trustees by appointment "3rd day eve at 7 or a little after," i.e., Sep-
temper 24, 1872. The article appearing in the RichTtiond Palladium on
September 28, 1872, was signed only "A Citizen." Although there is
no reference to it in the Mote journal there can be no doubt that he
was the author, since it is his characteristic phraseology and his con-
cem. There IS no evidence that anyone else in Richmond had any
particular interest in the matter or was writing about it.
2*Neitter Mote's journal nor local newspapers made further
reference to the matter.
••;: y^vr.
. Vt,_. ..
4-zS>^
\ ftS4 Indin.nn. Maaazinp. of Hisio'n
334 Indiana Magazine of History
men and young women and send tliem out in the world to
fill posts of usefulness, not fully fitted and prepared for
their duties. That Drawing and Designing have been almost
entirely omitted in the course of study is to be lamented. . . .
This hint we hope will be kindly taken by whomsoever it may
concern, and we hope with profit.""
Ten years were to pass before Mote saw his wish come
true for Earlham. He had to wait fourteen years for art to
be introduced into the public school curriculum. Authentic
information as to further steps taken and Mote's connection
with them is lacking, but tradition gives him credit for the
achievement, not only in Richmond but in Indiana. In 1886,
when Justin N. Study was superintendent of schools for
the city, art became part of the curriculum and has been
taught continuously since that time."
According to an article in the Indianapolis Journal by
a reporter who visited the old artist, then nearly eighty
years old, Mote "secured the petition which caused the legis
lature to provide that the public schools of Indiana should
teach drawing. The petition was presented by Sen. Wil
liam Baxter, since deceased. Two years previously the Quak
er artist had secured the teaching of drawing in the public
scliools of Richmond by ordinance."" Inasmuch as William
Baxter's terms of service in the legislature were in 1875 and
1877, and since no such act was passed until later after art
teaching had become fairly general, the reporter seems to have
made an inaccurate statement. It may be that Mote related
efforts he had made toward the passage of the act but may
have been confused about the sequence of events.
Whatever the details may have been, there can be no
doubt that in actively promoting the introduction of art into
the school curriculum and in giving art instruction in his
own studio Mote was a local prophet whose work, combined
with that of others throughout the country, was responsible
for the general acceptance of art as a valuable field for gen
eral instruction.
25 Richmond Independent, June 29, 1872.
2" According to Earlham catalogs, the first teacher of drawing and
painting at the college was Florence. Chandlee in 1882-1883; followed
bv M Gertrudo Bailev, 1883-1887; Harry D. Williams, 1887-1888; and
John EKvood Bundv, 1888-189(), who built up the art department to a
high level of excellence. The Richmond Evening Item, September 11,
1886, published a list of public school teachers in 1886-1887, including
the name of Mary E. Johnson as the first supendsor and teacher of
drawing.
27 Reprinted in the Richmond Palladium-Item, December 29, 1943;
the date of the original publication was probably in the early ISSO's.
S
, K >-- ,-r^
C#3^V..;'
^r^
: C C' "V'
) ^ ^ .i' •
' hQ ^ •
•tal?:.'--
•O ^